57 Considerations of the Court 96. The Court will now proceed to determine who should be considered an “injured party” in the terms of Article 63(1) of the American Convention and who will be beneficiaries of the reparations that the Court establishes, in relation to pecuniary damage, when applicable, and in relation to non-pecuniary damage. 97. The Court considers that the following are “injured parties”: Jorge Carpio Nicolle, Juan Vicente Villacorta Fajardo, Alejandro Ávila Guzmán, Rigoberto Rivas González, Sydney Shaw Díaz, Martha Arrivillaga de Carpio, Mario Arturo López Arrivillaga, Sydney Shaw Arrivillaga, Ricardo San Pedro Suárez, Jorge Carpio Arrivillaga, Rodrigo Carpio Arrivillaga, Karen Fischer, Rodrigo Carpio Fischer, Daniela Carpio Fischer, Silvia Arrivillaga de Villacorta, Álvaro Martín Villacorta Arrivillaga, Silvia Piedad Villacorta Arrivillaga, Juan Carlos Villacorta Arrivillaga, María Isabel Villacorta Arrivillaga, José Arturo Villacorta Arrivillaga, Rosa Everilda Mansilla Pineda, Lisbeth Azucena Rivas Mansilla, Dalia Yaneth Rivas Mansilla, César Aníbal Rivas Mansilla, Nixon Rigoberto Rivas Mansilla, Sonia Lisbeth Hernández Saraccine, Alejandro Ávila Hernández, Sydney Roberto Ávila Hernández, María Paula González Chamo and María Nohemi Guzmán, as victims of the respective violations indicated above (supra para. 82(a) to (g)); they are therefore the beneficiaries of the reparations that the Court shall establish, for both pecuniary damage, when applicable, and non-pecuniary damage. 98. Karen Fischer, former daughter-in-law of the victim, Jorge Carpio Nicolle, shall also be the beneficiary of reparation equal to that of a daughter of Mr. Carpio Nicolle, since it was proved that, emotionally, she was like daughter for the victim124 and that she had worked at his side from when she was young (supra para. 76(74)). In addition, Mrs. Fischer furthered Mr. Carpio Nicolle’s judicial proceeding during several years, so that she endured threats and an attack on her life (supra paras. 76(75) to 76(77)). It has equally been proved that Mrs. Fischer’s children, Daniela and Rodrigo Carpio Fischer, were very affected by the death of their grandfather, Mr. Carpio Nicolle (supra para. 76(78)), and had close ties to him. Subsequently, Mrs. Fischer and her two children were forced to go into exile (supra para. 76(76)). 99. The distribution of the compensation among the next of kin of Messrs. Carpio Nicolle, Villacorta Fajardo, Ávila Guzmán and Rivas González, for loss of earning and non-pecuniary damage, shall be as follows; a) Fifty percent (50%) of the compensation shall be delivered to the person who was the wife of the victim at the time of his death; b) Fifty percent (50%) of the compensation shall be shared, in equal parts, among the children of each of the victims; and c) Should there be no next of kin in one or any of the categories defined in subparagraphs (a) and (b), the amount that would have corresponded to 124 Cf. Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez. Interpretation of the judgment on preliminary objections, merits, and reparations. (Art. 67 American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of November 26, 2003. Series C No. 102, para. 65; Case of the Caracazo. Reparations (Art. 63.1 American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of August 29, 2002. Series C No. 95, paras. 91.(c) and 105; and Case of the “Panel Blanca” (Paniagua Morales et al.). Reparations (Art. 63.1 American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of May 25, 2001. Series C No. 76, para. 109.